On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 11:18:33 -0500, Greg Fast <gdf at speakeasy.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 23:54:57 -0500, Andy Lester <andy at petdance.com> wrote:
> > > the light would be a lot less dim if the darned thing would actually
> > > *install* properly.
> > >
> > > dha, admits that he seems to be the only one with this problem
> >
> > You're on OSX? I can't get it to compile there, either, so I've
> > installed binaries.
>> Getting up and running with the client is pretty easy, since you can (often)
> just grab binaries. The server is more painful, especially if you go
> the "preferred" route of embedding it in apache2...
>> We should have someone (Leland? Myself?) give a talk on SVK, and then
> svn really will be the Coolest Thing Ever.
I'm certainly not familiar enough with svk to do that. And anyways,
installing svk is even harder than installing svn. I think CPAN.pm
ended up dying on me becuase of circular dependences.
SVK is really neat though. One central repository with (optional?)
partial mirrors of of the repositories of everything you're working
on. No CVS or .svn directories. Every operation can be done offline
(though offline commits usually lead to ugly n-way merges).
Subversion will be much nicer after 1.1 is released - no more Berkley DB.
If anyone want to glance at slides, there are some nice ones at
http://wagner.elixus.org/~clkao/svk-intro/
--
Leland Johnson
http://protoplasmic.org